Tanev and Edler are the only representation of NHL caliber Defenceman yet we are constantly trading them. Our D is awful as it is, trade one of those two and it becomes far worse than awful. We don’t have an embarrassment of riches back there.

The guy to trade is Sutter. We have someone named Gaudette who is in the A because of him. Trading Sutter won’t hurt us like trading Edler or Tanev

I can imagine a conversation between Green, Johnson and Benning (and whoever else constitutes the brain trust on such a subject) in early February about whether Gaudette is ready for Sutter’s spot. Not a conversation about how well Sutter is playing at the time, but whether Gaudette can acceptably take on Sutter’s tasks.

Then we’ll see what Benning can get for him. Depending on how the club is faring, similar discussions may be had concerning the likes of Dahlen and Granlund/Baertschi/Eriksson. Let’s hope the kids in Utica give Benning the opportunity to offload some vets by the deadline.

Yup. This will be a development year for us for sure. As kids improve, they will see time up here to see if they are ready to handle the roles. If they are, we will see them take over spots and keep them.

As the injuries hit vets this year, there should be real fear regarding job security. We could have A surprising year (85 points) but it will be because when a rookie like Gaudette or Joulevi gets called up, they will be playing to not be sent down. Everyone knows vets can get waived from us this year, and it will create a sense of urgency.

This entire year should be looked at as a big long training camp!!

The 'Chain of Command' is the chain I am going to beat you with until you understand I am in charge.

We talk about this being a development year, but so will 2019/20. Forwards I think we are ok on, it is the D that worries me the most and I see nothing on the farm that alleviates my worries. The reason I want Edler to be moved, well he is Edler and I wanted him gone for years. Tanev if we can get a good deal because we sorely need some more picks/prospects and to be honest by the time the Canucks are relevant again, Tanev will have zero value. I am ok with keeping him if there is no deal in place.

Lastly JB needs to concentrate on D for the next 18 months, going into 2019/20 with 4 of the current 6 will make me cry, 3 will make me shed a tear, 5 or 6 will make me burn my Canucks jersey.

If past performance is any indication, this d group will be minus Tanev at least 20 games while he recovers from injury.

Better to recover an asset for him while he still have value. It's not like it would be the difference between the Canucks making the playoffs or not.

Crushing the confidence of 18 year olds....isnt that wanting us to become the coilers fromt the last 15 years? How many good young coiler prospects lost their will to win by getting bitch slapped around by the league?

If past performance is any indication, this d group will be minus Tanev at least 20 games while he recovers from injury.

Better to recover an asset for him while he still have value. It's not like it would be the difference between the Canucks making the playoffs or not.

Crushing the confidence of 18 year olds....isnt that wanting us to become the coilers fromt the last 15 years? How many good young coiler prospects lost their will to win by getting bitch slapped around by the league?

I don't think having Tanev in the lineup for 50-60 games will make that big a difference. The Canucks are going to lose a lot of games this season (and probably next season) anyway. They can only afford to draft the kind of prospects with the mental toughness to fight through that, or to focus on what they can control (their own development).

We know the Oilers have been bad at getting the most out of their prospects. What evidence do we have that this is a result of an oppressive feeling of hopelessness?

I'd only move Tanev if you can land a big right side dman who is a year or two away from the pros - would have to get that from a contender who wants to win within these next two years and that team is the Tampa Bay Lightning, they seem like the most logical fit right now for a Tanev move sacrificing a prospect. To sweeten the pot for their new GM who is a Habs fan/French, we could throw in Brisebois so they get a top pairing dman now and a future dman to lessen the hit they'd take by moving Foote.

Looking at their defense on the right, Girardi belongs on the bottom pairing, but he was getting top 4 minutes last season.

They let go of Dotchin after a couple years of him coming into camp waaaaay out of shape & he was getting the 5th most TOI minutes.

To make the cap work if they took on Tanev we'd have to take Coburn back, which also lets Sergachev move back to left.

Jesus christ check out their new top 6 if they traded for Tanev.

Hedman - Tanev
McDonagh - Stralman
Sergachev - Girardi

TBL wins the Cup and the Canucks get Cal Foote who will help us when we are ready to contend in a few years.

A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."

There’s a wizard on this board that thinks the D is just fine. It’s all the coaches fault

I honestly cant think who has a weaker d league wide Blob. Theres help coming but right now its all stems and seeds

For all the folks here who’ve hacked on the Juolevi pick. Considering the state of the blueline and the fact the only premier prospects in the system are Juolevi, Hughes and Woo, maybe having Juolevi in the fold as opposed to Tkachuk doesn’t look so bad. You can make the argument that Benning could have picked another D like Sergachev or Chychrun, but it’s good to have depth in the system on D.

Another reason why the most sound trade chips Benning has are forwards vice Dmen. You can’t have enough depth on the blueline.

There’s a wizard on this board that thinks the D is just fine. It’s all the coaches fault

I honestly cant think who has a weaker d league wide Blob. Theres help coming but right now its all stems and seeds

For all the folks here who’ve hacked on the Juolevi pick. Considering the state of the blueline and the fact the only premier prospects in the system are Juolevi, Hughes and Woo, maybe having Juolevi in the fold as opposed to Tkachuk doesn’t look so bad. You can make the argument that Benning could have picked another D like Sergachev or Chychrun, but it’s good to have depth in the system on D.

Another reason why the most sound trade chips Benning has are forwards vice Dmen. You can’t have enough depth on the blueline.

Disagree 100%, having a top forward that can be traded for a top d man is much better option than having drafted a top d that may not make the NHL. True you can never have enough d prospects but at the position he was picked he should be better.

What do you think the Leaves would rather receive for Nylander - RFA compensation of a 1st, 2nd and 3rd from Vegas/Winnipeg/Boston (i.e. teams with cap space and likely to make the playoffs), or Canucks' 1st?

The rumour on TSN is that Nylander is stuck on $8 mil, Leaves are stuck on Pastrnak's $6.66 mil. Makes me wonder whether the Leaves would necessarily match an offer sheet at the top of the 1st/2nd/3rd range, $8.118 mil.

What do you think the Leaves would rather receive for Nylander - RFA compensation of a 1st, 2nd and 3rd from Vegas/Winnipeg/Boston (i.e. teams with cap space and likely to make the playoffs), or Canucks' 1st?

The rumour on TSN is that Nylander is stuck on $8 mil, Leaves are stuck on Pastrnak's $6.66 mil. Makes me wonder whether the Leaves would necessarily match an offer sheet at the top of the 1st/2nd/3rd range, $8.118 mil.

I can’t see Benning trading our first. I know the Canucks want to use the draft to hype ticket sales and they are planning some type of draft party. The only way he trades the first is if we somehow get another first I think. Maybe he trDesour 2010 first, I dunno.

Trading for Nylander would not just be the loss of a pick. We’d have to waive someone. Don’t get me wrong, a Nylander would go a long way in shoring up the top six but his demands and the acquisition cost may not make him a good fir at this point in time.